Tania Pariona Tarqui is an Indigenous Quechua human rights defender, activist from Peru, and Executive Secretary of the coalition Coordinadora Nacional de Derechos Humanos (CNDDHH). As she started defending the rights of children and youth during her teenage years, now an advocate for women’s rights across South America, her work is more than ever relevant, not only in Peru, but for the global anti-torture movement. Over the past few months, the country has passed a series of laws that threaten decades of efforts for justice and accountability. Passing through Geneva for various advocacy meetings, she tells us all about the state of human rights in Peru and what these laws will mean for human rights defenders and victims of torture and ill-treatment.
What is the current human rights situation in Peru?
Peru is experiencing severe setbacks in human rights, even in very basic rights that took decades to achieve, such as gender equality or the broad women’s movement, along with sexual and reproductive health. We are also facing setbacks in terms of memory of our past. Recently, an Amnesty Law was passed to ensure impunity for serious human rights violations committed by the Armed Forces, the National Police, and self-defense committees during the internal armed conflict of the 1980s-2000s. This paves the way for impunity for those linked to crimes against humanity and erases the memory of thousands of victims who have waited decades for justice. In Peru today, our rights are not guaranteed, there is no protection.
What is the impact of these laws?
For families of victims of the 1980s conflict, as well as those killed in the 2022–2023 protests, these impunity measures deny justice and memory, rewriting history in ways that contradict lived experience. This “turning the page” denies grave violations. This is a hard blow to families who have fought for decades. The Amnesty Law would affect hundreds of cases, not isolated events. The State claims this law responds to terrorism, but in reality, it benefits human rights violators in the security forces implicated in torture, extrajudicial executions, and enforced disappearances.
What about human rights defenders?
Many human rights lawyers and organisations advocate for justice, but this law blocks their work by pardoning perpetrators of serious violations. Defenders are also stigmatised as “terrorists” or “terrorist sympathisers”. The term “terrorist” is indiscriminately applied by authorities, politicians, and even President Boluarte to delegitimise human rights defense. But lawyers are defending victims, not terrorists.
What can be done?
Raising a collective voice is essential. International solidarity must echo demands for justice globally. It is indispensable to maintain hope for a real democracy, not just the act of voting, but one that is intercultural, equal, and inclusive of Indigenous peoples and women. Currently, there are no political participation mechanisms for Indigenous peoples or Indigenous women. This is not true democracy.
The mechanisms of the UN and of the inter-American system are crucial, not only to issue recommendations but also to adopt a firm stance. Too often, human rights violations and violence against women are normalised. The international community must rethink its actions and strengthen democracies, protection mechanisms, and resources for defenders. Civil society is vital to democracy, yet civic space in Peru is shrinking. Without human rights, there is no democracy.
What is most important when defending human rights under these conditions?
Defending human rights today must go beyond the human rights community, reaching society at large. Youth and children must be included, with schools and communities addressing these issues. I come from a generation that witnessed progress thanks to older sisters who fought for important policy change. Now it is our duty to defend those advances, ensuring they remain for future generations.
Peru’s message of granting amnesty for crimes against humanity is disastrous, signaling to the world that impunity is acceptable. But as global conflicts show, impunity only harms the poorest and most vulnerable. We cannot normalise this; we must confront it now.
What message would you like to send to the international community?
To the international community: in Peru today, citizens’ rights are being violated, especially those who raise their voice against measures affecting our well-being and future.
Peru often presents itself abroad as a defender of human rights, but right now Peruvians have no guarantees of these rights. It is crucial that the international community pay attention, especially to cases of torture and arbitrary detention of activists, students, and indigenous women. Our call is for the international community not only to express concern but also to be present, speak out, and advocate for the rights of Peruvians.
On 27 March 2026, Pablo López Alavez was released following a ruling by the High Court of Justice of the State of Oaxaca on appeal. The decision revised the legal classification of the offences and imposed a sentence of 15 years and 3 months imprisonment for the offence of simple homicide. Taking into account the time the human rights defender had spent in detention since his arbitrary arrest on 15 August 2010, the court considered the sentence to have been served and ordered his immediate release. Although the sentence remains in force, his release represents a significant step forward after more than 15 years of detention. Due to concerns for Pablo’s safety and that of his family, as well as for security reasons, this information is only being made public now.
Pablo has been released after a fight for justice and freedom of over 15 years, led by his wife, the woman human rights defender Yolanda Pérez Cruz, and organisations from the state of Oaxaca, as well as Mexican and international civil society organizations. Activists, collectives and human rights organisations celebrate the release of our colleague Pablo López Alavez, a Zapotec forest defender originally from the community of San Isidro Aloapam, Oaxaca. This long journey would not have been possible without the support and solidarity shown from all corners of the world. We thank all the organisations, individuals and collectives who never gave up on their efforts and commitment to securing his release over the course of more than 15 years. We thank the international bodies for their sensitivity in highlighting the political use of the criminal justice and the prison system to criminalise and impose prolonged punishment on human rights defenders in Mexico.
His family were forcibly displaced from their community due to the constant and serious threats they have faced as a result of their struggle for justice and the defence of human rights: so they are currently under protective measures granted by the Oaxaca State Human Rights Ombudsman’s Office (DDHPO). We emphasise that Pablo’s detention and his family’s forced displacement have had profound impacts on their well-being, including chronic illnesses, cultural and community displacement, as well as the necessity of having to learn Spanish against their will and adapt to an urban, mestizo environment.
The fight for justice continues. We, the undersigned organisations, call on the Federal Judiciary to conduct a thorough review of the case, as the ruling that convicted him lacks a solid basis. In order to put an end to the criminalisation that the defender has faced for more than 15 years, an acquittal must be issued in favour of the forest defender and comprehensive measures must be adopted to provide redress for the harm caused. This implies ensuring that the authorities responsible for the serious violations committed against him are properly investigated, prosecuted and punished, as well as implementing all necessary measures to protect his physical integrity and psychological well-being, as well as that of his family and the organisations that have supported them. Finally, our organisations emphasise the obligation of the Mexican authorities to establish robust guarantees of non-repetition.
The conviction was issued without taking into account the serious inconsistencies and contradictions in the evidence presented by the prosecution. Nor did it give due consideration to the evidence presented by the defence, which demonstrated that the human rights defender was elsewhere when the events of which he was accused took place.
Nine years after the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention issuedOpinion 23/2017, which concluded that Pablo’s deprivation of liberty is arbitrary and motivated by his legitimate work in environmental defence; and that, similarly, in December 2020, a group of United Nations Special Rapporteurs issued the joint communication UA MEX 14/2020 calling for his release and the adoption of comprehensive reparatory measures; both of these opinions by international United Nations experts remain unfulfilled.
We therefore demand that the State of Mexico, in compliance with its international obligations, put an end to the serious and systematic violations of the rights of the forest defender Pablo López Alavez, and we call on the authorities to:
Comply immediately with the recommendations set out in Opinion 23/2017 and UN Urgent Action UA MEX 14/2020, including comprehensive redress and guarantees of non-repetition;
Overturn the conviction issued on 27 March 2026 and acquit Pablo López Alavez, given the lack of a proper assessment of the evidence, which resulted in his wrongful imprisonment and prevented him from continuing to defend the territory;
Ensure comprehensive and effective protection measures for him and his family, who remain under constant harassment and threat;
Refrain from the misuse of criminal law against defenders of the territory and indigenous peoples, and ensure that no unfounded criminal proceedings are initiated or pursued on the grounds of the legitimate exercise of their defence of human rights.
This year’s EU Report on Human Rights and Democracy in the World is looking back at a year that has been remarkable for the persistence and variety of conflicts, and for widespread shifts away from an international rules-based order to one based on autocratic power, where self-interest takes precedence over solidarity.
There is a stark contrast between current geo-political trends and the achievements recounted in this year’s EU Report on Human Rights and Democracy in the World report. Made up of many stories, the report outlines the positive results of people in countries all over the world coming together to make a positive difference. We want to tell these stories because the principles enshrined in the founding EU treaties are noble and universal, and because today it takes strong resolve to speak difficult truths and keep the European Union (EU) on the right side of history.
The EU continues to act in a world characterised by fear and uncertainty. For the EU, the compass of universal human rights has kept us on a steady course, charted in the EU Action Plan on Human Rights and Democracy, and the EU Report on Human Rights and Democracy follows the same structure. The report presents stories about protecting and empowering individuals, building resilient, inclusive and democratic societies, promoting a global system for human rights and democracy, harnessing opportunities and addressing challenges and ensuring we deliver by working with our partners.
Amid these challenges, and as this report makes clear, the European Union remains a steady force for good in the world, not least because our interests and values – grounded in universal norms – are one and the same. That is why we are still the partner of choice for those who want to foster cooperation for human rights and democracy globally. This report contains many examples of our positive work that I hope can serve as inspiration to others.
The last 12 months have brought innumerable small victories for human rights and democracy, from the many moves away from the death penalty, to the new generation rising to the challenge of public participation, online and in the streets, in Gen Z movements across the globe. We can see that democracy, human rights and justice remain an aspiration and a source of hope. Several elections in 2025 resulted in peaceful transfers of power, demonstrating the resilience of democratic institutions.
The EU accompanied many of these high points, whether through election monitoring, capacity building, or celebrations and public statements, just as it lent a hand to shed light on human rights violations and democratic backsliding by giving voice to victims, supporting human rights defenders at risk, leading efforts in multilateral fora or manoeuvring through quiet diplomacy.
The 2025 EU Report on Human Rights and Democracy shows that human rights are not just words for us, but take the form of actions of all kinds by our countless partners around the world as well of course as EU actors, whether in Brussels or in EU Delegations, offices and missions.
As this report attests, promoting and defending human rights and democracy around the world is a long-term commitment for the EU, requiring collective efforts that often need time to bring results. But working with partners to preserve and improve human dignity, basic freedoms and justice contributes to creating a solid and lasting foundation on which we can all build prosperity through sustainable development.
Learning from the unprecedented challenges of 2025, the EU carries on working to uphold human rights and democracy, and is proud to continue to promote these important stories of hope and impact.
On 30 July 2026 UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Volker Türk denounced the crackdown on dissent in Uganda, alongside a gradual erosion of the rule of law, increased military involvement in civilian institutions, and shrinking civic space – all of which are creating a climate of fear throughout the country.
“I am appalled that the authorities are increasingly targeting any form of dissent, and deepening restrictions on the fundamental freedoms of all those living in Uganda,” said Türk. “Those who dare to speak out are silenced.”
Since the general elections on 15 January 2026, repression has increased against all those perceived to oppose the Government. According to information received by the UN Human Rights Office, since the elections, at least 50 opposition leaders and supporters, five human rights defenders and five journalists have been subjected to human rights violations. These include instances of enforced disappearance, torture and ill-treatment, and arbitrary arrest or detention based on legal provisions which do not comply with international human rights law.
In addition, 10 leading civil society organisations have been suspended since January 2026, while others have been closely scrutinised and, at times, subjected to harassment.
The Office has also received information about increased military involvement in functions ordinarily carried out by civilian institutions. Some media outlets have been forced to close temporarily.
In May 2026, the Protection of Sovereignty Act was enacted, imposing extensive restrictions on international funding and foreign engagement with civil society organisations. The legislation includes severe penalties, including prison sentences of up to 10 years for violations.
“The actions of the authorities are creating a climate of fear that is increasing self-censorship, further stifling public debate and deepening polarisation,” said Türk.
“I call on the Government to abide by its obligations under international human rights law, the African Charter and the Ugandan Constitution to ensure a vibrant civil society where everyone can freely express their views and participate in public affairs,” he added.
The UN Human Rights Chief urged the Government to uphold the separation of powers and the rule of law, including by preventing military interference in civil institutions..
On 31 July 2026, Adil Zawahir, Alexandra C Panait and Kulsoom Rizvi published a blog post on their study of how dissidents are stopped from entering or leaving their countries
When we think of state censorship, we often picture prison cells, violent police crackdowns or control of newsrooms. However, our report titled The weaponisation of travel bans to silence speech and dissent published today by Index on Censorship reveals a quieter, less visible tool of state repression that is devastating civil society across the world.
We found that rather than protecting public safety, governments are increasingly manipulating “national security” or “public order” exemptions to trap journalists, fracture families and exile critics. Our research shows that these bans are highly adaptable tools that occur around politically sensitive events such as protests, elections and crackdowns on democratic activity. Their shared, devastating objective is to control narratives, block external scrutiny and create a chilling effect on free expression.
As we researched this topic, we strongly felt that to understand the severity of this crisis, the spotlight must remain entirely on the impacted individuals. The victims of this widespread authoritarian trend pay with their lives and livelihoods being upended by arbitrary and undemocratic measures.
Our analysis highlights that in authoritarian contexts, travel bans act as overt tools of absolute repression. In Saudi Arabia, they function as a form of “quasi-detention”, ensuring that prisoners of conscience remain silenced long after they are physically released from their cells. Take the example of Salma Al-Shehab, a doctoral student at Leeds University, who was imprisoned simply for tweeting in support of women’s rights. Upon her release, she was handed an eight-year travel ban, effectively destroying her academic career by barring her return to the United Kingdom.
Similarly, in Algeria, our research shows how journalists like Mustapha Bendjama find themselves trapped in a bureaucratic nightmare. Extrajudicial travel bans, known as ISTNs, are routinely issued by security agencies without formal judicial oversight, leaving targets in a legal vacuum with no clear avenues for appeal. Bendjama shared with us that this forced isolation acts as a “mental imprisonment” that has dried up his sources and severely compromised his ability to conduct rigorous journalism.
One of our most troubled findings was that the chilling effect of these restrictions extends well beyond authoritarian states, creeping into hybrid democracies. In India, administrative tools like “Look Out Circulars” are deployed to trap critical voices within the country’s borders. Sanna Irshad Mattoo, a Pulitzer Prize-winning photojournalist, was prevented from travelling to New York to accept her award, sending a clear message that international recognition offers no immunity from state retaliation.
In Georgia, foreign journalists who report critically on the country’s democratic backsliding have been arbitrarily denied re-entry at the border using generic legislative clauses. French journalist Clément Giradot was refused entry after reporting on political demonstrations, a decision that suddenly separated him from his home, his Georgian wife and his young child without any concrete legal justification.
It became clear to us that these are not isolated administrative errors. We believe they are part of a coordinated assault on international human rights. Whether it is Nicaragua arbitrarily revoking citizenship to render critics stateless, Belarus forcing exiled dissidents into jeopardy by refusing to renew passports abroad or the United States deploying visa revocations and social media screenings against lawfully present critics, the goal appears to be one: to enforce widespread self-censorship and fear.
The international community can no longer treat these administrative traps as routine border control measures. We urgently recommend taking action. States must do away with these opaque directives, end the use of secondary travel bans as a form of collective punishment against families and align their domestic laws with international human rights standards. Furthermore, democratic host nations must step in to provide secure legal status and alternative travel documents for exiled dissidents while applying sustained diplomatic pressure to demand the lifting of these arbitrary restrictions globally.
Respecting and protecting freedom of speech should not know any ideological boundaries or state borders. With this report, we express our solidarity with the brave ones who raised their voices and with many more who were silenced and never known. While researching and interviewing participants at the front lines of this injustice, we were reminded of the importance of academia’s role as both a sanctuary for freedom of expression and a service to society at large.
Khurram Parvez, coordinator of the Jammu Kashmir Coalition of Civil Society (JKCCS) and Chair of the Asian Federation Against Involuntary Disappearances (AFAD), has spent decades documenting human rights violations in Indian-administered Kashmir, including enforced disappearances, torture and extrajudicial killings. Irfan Mehraj, a journalist and human rights defender associated with JKCCS, has similarly contributed to documenting and reporting on human rights concerns in the region.
Both human rights defenders have faced prosecution under spurious allegations related to terrorism and secessionism that human rights organisations have consistently characterised as politically motivated and unsupported by credible evidence. The charges against both defenders remain in place, and the conditions attached to Khurram Parvez’s release continue to impose severe restrictions on his rights and freedoms. The international community, including the UN human rights system, must remain closely engaged until all charges are dropped and any restrictions on their work and freedom come to an end.
22 July 2022: The case in which Khurram Parvez, a prominent Kashmiri human rights defender, and Irfan Mehraj, a Kashmiri journalist and human rights defender – both associated with the Jammu Kashmir Coalition of Civil Society (JKCCS) – have been granted bail involves trumped-up charges of “funding terror activities” and “propagation of secessionist agenda” in retaliation for their widely respected and recognised human rights documentation and accountability work through JKCCS. On 18 July 2026, a New Delhi District Court held the bail hearing in this case.
In June 2023, the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention (UNWGAD), in its Opinion No. 8/2023, determined that Khurram Parvez’s detention was arbitrary and called on the Indian authorities to immediately and unconditionally release him.
Although the conditional release of the two defenders comes as a relief, after a prolonged period of arbitrary pre-trial detention, the harassment through legal means against them continues, in a context of longstanding and ongoing grave violations of human rights and fundamental freedoms in Jammu and Kashmir.
The Observatory calls on the Indian authorities to drop all charges against Khurram and Irfan, as they are part of politically motivated proceedings aimed at discrediting their legitimate work and the JKCCS.
An old friend, professor Bert Lockwood and his daughter Meredith, run a podcast series “Human Rights: Conversations Across Generations”. With great pleasure did one as it is true that much of the recent NGO history on human rights remains unrecorded so it will serve a purpose one day. It is now officially live. Listening Links:
We, the undersigned organisations and partners from around the world, reaffirm our unwavering solidarity with human rights defenders (HRDs) who continue to face judicial harassment, arbitrary detention, and persecution for their peaceful human rights work. We call for the release of all unjustly imprisoned activists and demand an end to attacks against HRDs.
On the sixth anniversary of the Stand As My Witness (SAMW) campaign, 15 July 2026, we stand together to highlight the ongoing unlawful targeting of defenders and to renew our collective commitment to their protection and release.
Launched in July 2020, the Stand As My Witness campaign was created to shine a light on the misuse of repressive national laws to silence human rights defenders and to mobilise international solidarity in response. Since its inception, the campaign has worked to raise awareness of emblematic cases, coordinate joint advocacy actions, and challenge the growing criminalisation of human rights activism.
At its launch, the campaign issued a call urging civil society organisations and allies worldwide to stand in solidarity with detained and persecuted defenders. This call was endorsed by more than 190 organisations, helping to draw international attention to the misuse of judicial systems to suppress dissent and civic freedoms, and harm those who fight for justice.
Over the past six years, sustained advocacy, international pressure, and collective action have contributed to the release of more than 31 human rights defenders, demonstrating the tangible impact of global solidarity.
Despite these achievements, many activists remain unfairly jailed. We remain deeply concerned that attacks against human rights defenders continue to intensify across all regions. Governments are increasingly resorting to restrictive laws, politicised judicial systems, surveillance, digital repression, and arbitrary detention to target activists, journalists, environmental defenders, women human rights defenders, Indigenous leaders, and others working to uphold human rights and fundamental freedoms.
The CIVICUS 2025 People Power Under Attack Report states that civic freedoms are being curtailed in a record number of countries. Civil society is under severe attack in 122 of 198 countries and territories with detention of protesters, journalists and human rights defenders as among the top violations globally.
Through this joint statement, we call on governments worldwide to:
Immediately and unconditionally release all arbitrarily detained human rights defenders;
End the misuse of laws and judicial systems to criminalise peaceful activism and repeal laws seeking to silence dissent;
Guarantee the rights to freedom of expression, association, and peaceful assembly;
Cease propagating false information and anti-rights narratives, and use of digital platforms against civil society and human rights defenders; and
Ensure the protection and safety of all human rights defenders in accordance with international human rights law.
We emphasise that human rights defenders are not criminals and terrorists, but courageous and concerned individuals who work to advance justice, dignity, accountability, and freedom for all.
On 2 july 2026 the undersigned bar associations, law societies, lawyers’ organisations, and human rights institutions, expressed serious concern regarding the enforced disappearance, incommunicado detention, public humiliation, and criminal prosecution of Ugandan lawyer and senior opposition figure Advocate Erias Lukwago on misprision of treason charges.
Advocate Lukwago is a prominent lawyer from Uganda, former mayor of Kampala, and co-lead counsel for opposition leader Dr. Kizza Besigye, and Haji Obeid Lutale, in proceedings that have attracted significant national, regional, and international attention. These proceedings include a suit against Uganda’s Chief of Defence Forces, General Muhoozi Kainerugaba, the son of Uganda’s President Yoweri Museveni, in connection with alleged statements repeatedly threatening Dr. Besigye’s life on social media.
According to information placed before the High Court Uganda, on 15 June 2026, armed individuals reportedly dressed in Uganda People’s Defence Forces (UPDF) attire surrounded Advocate Lukwago’s residence, scaled the perimeter wall, forcibly entered his home, and removed him without producing a warrant or disclosing his destination. A habeas corpus application filed on his behalf alleged that he was taken by military personnel, held at an undisclosed location, and denied access to his family, legal counsel, and physician. The application further alleges that senior military officials publicly claimed responsibility for the operation through social media posts.
We are particularly concerned by widely circulated statements and images reportedly published by Uganda’s Chief of Defence Forces, General Muhoozi Kainerugaba through his official social media/X account, before Advocate Lukwago was brought before court. These statements appeared to claim responsibility for his detention, threaten him with physical punishment, subject him to public humiliation and ridicule, and suggest that he was being held in military custody. Such conduct is wholly incompatible with constitutional governance, the presumption of innocence, the dignity of detained persons, judicial independence, and the rule of law.
On 17 June 2026, Advocate Lukwago was produced before the Chief Magistrate’s Court of Makindye in Kampala and charged with misprision of treason under Section 25 of the Penal Code Act (Cap. 128), arising from allegations that he failed to disclose information relating to alleged treasonous activities. The charge comes after almost two years of him handling the same matter that he is being enjoined to. He denied the charge, and was remanded to Luzira Prison until Monday 22 June 2026, when his case was due to be mentioned and a ruling on bail delivered.
On 22 June 2026, Advocate Lukwago was produced before the Makindye Chief Magistrate’s Court for the ruling on his bail application, which had been sought on medical grounds in light of his deteriorating health. The ruling was deferred, reportedly citing the sensitivity of the case and security concerns at the court premises, and indicated that it would instead be delivered electronically through the Electronic Court Case Management Information System (ECCMIS). On 23 June 2026, bail was denied, arguing that despite Advocate Lukwago’s fixed housing and a documented medical condition requiring continuous treatment, these factors were insufficient to warrant his release. While directing the prison authorities to refer him to Mulago National Referral Hospital for a comprehensive medical assessment, the court ordered that he remain remanded at Luzira Prison, with the substantive case due to be mentioned again on 30 June 2026. We are deeply concerned that bail was denied notwithstanding credible and documented concerns regarding Advocate Lukwago’s health and the conditions of his detention, and urge for his medical needs be addressed
We note that misprision of treason under section 25 of the Penal Code Act (Cap. 128) is framed as a failure to disclose known treasonous intent. The application of this provision to a practising lawyer raises serious concerns regarding legal professional privilege and the duty of confidentiality — key obligations to the right to effective legal representation, which a lawyer cannot lawfully set aside. We further note that the East Africa Law Society, the apex regional bar association in East Africa, has already expressed grave concern regarding the circumstances of Advocate Lukwago’s detention and has emphasized that advocates must never be targeted or subjected to reprisals for carrying out their professional duties.
A Pattern of Interference with Defence Counsel This incident cannot be viewed in isolation. It forms part of a documented pattern of arrests, intimidation, reprisals, and interference directed at lawyers and legal representatives involved in politically sensitive matters in Uganda.
Most notably, human rights lawyer Eron Kiiza, a member of Dr. Besigye’s legal team, was arrested, assaulted, summarily convicted by the General Court Martial, and imprisoned on 7th January 2025 while attempting to represent his client. In a further reported incident, lawyer Ronald Iduli, also a member of the defence team, was allegedly subjected to an early morning raid of his family home on December 10, 2024. Reports further indicate that, on a separate occasion, lawyer Mariam Lutale was forcibly removed from a courtroom by uniformed personnel following a verbal protest directed at the presiding judge. We are gravely concerned by these cumulative reports and call for their independent investigation.
This pattern of interference has since extended to regional counsel. On 22 June 2026, shortly before the scheduled bail ruling, Kenyan Senior Counsel Martha Karua, a former Minister for Justice and Constitutional Affairs of Kenya, leader of the People’s Liberation Party, and the leader of the legal team representing Dr. Besigye and Haji Obeid Lutale, was denied entry into Uganda at Entebbe International Airport, and deported to Kenya. Ms. Karua had travelled to Kampala to support Advocate Lukwago’s defence team and observe the proceedings. She was reportedly held incommunicado at the airport and had her telephone taken from her before being returned to Kenya without any explanation, while other members of the delegation, including the President of the Law Society of Kenya, were cleared to enter. [see also: https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2026/01/08/ugandan-human-rights-lawyer-sarah-bireete-detained/]
The cumulative effect of these incidents has been to significantly reduce the number of lawyers willing and able to participate in proceedings of direct public interest. This is a matter of serious concern for the administration of justice and for the rights of the accused to legal representation of their choosing in Uganda.
Applicable Legal Standards
Lawyers must be able to carry out their professional duties without intimidation, harassment, threats, surveillance, arrest, detention, or other reprisals. The targeting of lawyers because of the clients they represent or the causes they advance strikes at the heart of the administration of justice and undermines public confidence in the rule of law.
Principle 16 of the United Nations Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers provides that governments shall ensure that lawyers are able to perform all their professional functions without intimidation, hindrance, harassment, or improper interference and shall not suffer, or be threatened with, prosecution or other sanctions for actions taken in accordance with their professional duties.
Principle 18 of the United Nations Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers also provides that lawyers shall not be identified with their clients or their clients’ causes as a consequence of discharging their professional functions.
The circumstances surrounding Advocate Lukwago’s detention and prosecution are especially troubling because they appear to have arisen in the context of his professional representation of politically sensitive clients and while he was preparing to effect service of court process in proceedings involving those clients. Such actions taken against a lawyer in circumstances that appear connected to the discharge of professional duties raise serious concerns regarding interference with the independence of the legal profession and the administration of justice.
Call to Action
Accordingly, we call upon the Government of Uganda, the diplomatic community and all relevant authorities to:
Ensure a prompt, independent, impartial, and transparent investigation is conducted into the circumstances surrounding Advocate Lukwago’s enforced disappearance, detention, treatment, and alleged ill-treatment.
Ensure that any threats, intimidation, or interference directed at Advocate Lukwago in connection with his professional representation of his clients are promptly and efficiently investigated.
Ensure that all allegations of unlawful detention, torture, cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment, and violations of due process are independently investigated and that those responsible are held accountable.
Guarantee Advocate Lukwago’s safety, physical integrity, dignity, access to legal counsel of his choice family members, and medical treatment.
Ensure that all criminal proceedings against Advocate Lukwago are dropped for being an abuse of process and the privilege and privacy of communications between lawyers and clients or conducted strictly in accordance with the Constitution of Uganda, international human rights law, and fair trial guarantees.
Respect and protect the independence of the legal profession and ensure that lawyers are able to carry out their professional duties without intimidation, hindrance, harassment, reprisals, or improper interference.
Ensure that public officials, including military officials, refrain from statements or conduct that may undermine the presumption of innocence, interfere with ongoing judicial proceedings, intimidate lawyers, or otherwise prejudice the administration of justice.
Ensure that all lawyers and human rights defenders in Uganda can perform their professional duties without fear of reprisals, harassment, or undue interference, in accordance with international standards, notably by implementing the United Nations Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers.
Ensure the security, safety and dignity of the lawyers representing Dr. Kizza Besigye and Haji Obeid Lutale; and
The immediate reversal of the illegal declaration of Kenyan Senior Counsel Martha Karua, as persona non grata – a term alien to the domestic law of Uganda and reserved for diplomats in accordance with the Vienna Conventions – and guarantee her safe passage and entry into Uganda to proceed with her work of legally representing Dr. Kizza Besigye and Haji Obeid Lutale in their defense of the treason charges against them that carry a death sentence.
We further call upon regional and international bodies, including the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights, the East African Community, the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the Independence of Judges and Lawyers, and other relevant regional and international mechanisms to closely monitor this matter and take all appropriate measures to safeguard the independence of the legal profession and the rule of law in Uganda.
The independence of lawyers is not a privilege of the legal profession. It is a safeguard for society as a whole. When lawyers are intimidated, detained, threatened, or prosecuted because of their professional activities, access to justice, the right to a fair trial, and the rule of law itself are placed at risk. An attack on one lawyer for carrying out his or her professional duties is an attack on the administration of justice itself.
Signatories:
African Judges and Jurists Forum (AJJF)
Bar Human Rights Committee of England and Wales (BHRC)
Constitution Defenders Forum
Council of Bars and Law Societies of Europe (Conseil des Barreaux Européens, CCBE)
Deutscher Anwaltverein (German Bar Association)
Foundation Day of the Endangered Lawyer
Human Rights Institute of the Brussels Bar
Institute for the Rule of Law of the Union Internationale des Avocats (UIA-IROL)
International Association of People’s Lawyers (IAPL)
International Association of Russian Advocates
International Bar Association’s Human Rights Institute (IBAHRI)
International Commission of Jurists (ICJ)
International Observatory for Lawyers at Risk (OIAD)
Hans Thoolen on Human Rights Defenders and their awards 